[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re[2]: Advance-Decline data



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Hello Bill,

OddBall could be doing OK in spite of the composition of the NYSE.
Closed end funds have been around a while, albeit to an increasing
degree.   What I'm wondering is if OB could be even better with a
tigher definition of what an "issue" is.

To paraphrase another Bill, it depends on what your definition of issue
is.

-- 
Best regards,
 Jim Johnson                           mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thursday, March 21, 2002, 10:20:44 AM, you wrote:

>>   As they say, this issue seems non-trivial.

BW> I'll not argue that point at all, but has it
BW> effected breadth based systems performance? Again
BW> OddBall makes a nice benchmark as it uses breadth as
BW> its only criteria.

BW> BW




>>From: Jim Johnson <jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Reply-To: Jim Johnson <jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Advance-Decline data
>>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 08:27:09 -0500
>>
>>Hello omega-list,
>>
>>   I read McMillan's article in TASC last night about the junk that's
>>   included in the Advancing and Delcining issues data stream.  It
>>   seems a fairly compelling case (many issues are closed end bond
>>   funds that may change price by only 1 cent based on interest rate
>>   changes).  In addition, the 1 cent trade increment has cheapened the
>>   definition of an advance or a decline.  He does suggest that because
>>   these "bastard" issues (my term) have low volume, that advancing/
>>   declining volume may be a better alternative.
>>
>>   As they say, this issue seems non-trivial.
>>
>>   I appears that Neoticker's NeoBreadth product may attempt to create
>>   custom A-D indices.  Is that what it does, has anyone tried it?
>>   other thoughts on this data cancer problem amongst us?
>>
>>--
>>Best regards,
>>  Jim Johnson                         mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx